AN “ORGANIC UNION” OF CHURCHES.
By W. N. G.
The Christian Statesman is advocating an “organic union of the various branches of the church,” meaning the various denominations. An alliance, it claims, is not sufficient for aggressive work; it has not sufficient authority. The organic union that is suggested is to bear the same relation to the denominations within its compact as the United States Government does to the States. The alliance of denominations is compared to the outspread fingers of the open hand, “moved gently towards the combined hosts of immorality in our country, especially in political life;” but the organic union would be as “the compacting of fingers and thumb into a solid fist wielded by the controlling purpose of a single brain.” With such a power as this brought to bear—“specially in political life”—it is argued, “then something will drop, and drop hard.” The spirit and the doctrine that are behind this proposed political organization—to control both the church and the nation—are well set forth in the following brief extract from the long argument:— “In the good fight of faith under the Captain of9Salvation and the Prince of Peace, the smiting by the enemies of the King with the compacted fist of iniquity must be met by a heavier smiting with the compacted fist of righteousness. And the instrument of Almighty God in this smiting is his church.” The spirit that meets smiting with smiting is not the Spirit of Christ, and the church that works on this principle is not the church of Christ. That the smiting here advocated is not by “the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God,” is shown in the inference that it is to move in “political life,” which is always an appeal to the political power—ultimately the literal sword. The doctrine and example of Christ is set forth in the following scripture:— “The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine. Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagog, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said. And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou me?” Righteousness is not a fist smiter; it melts and subdues with the warm rays of love. “The Lord our Righteousness” has placed in our hands no other means of defeating the enemies of righteousness. True, the church needs “the controlling purpose of a single brain,” but is not Christ the Head of the church? Is not his “controlling purpose” sufficient? and is not that purpose plainly enunciated in his Word and in his example? The mission of the church is to proclaim the Word to “the enemies of the King,” and manifest his life in the lives of its members. Having faithfully done this, the results may safely be left with the Judge of all the earth. “Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord; I will repay.” But if the “Protestant” churches have so far departed from Protestantism as to desire “the controlling purpose of a single [human] brain,” they can find the very climax of such an ideal in the Roman Catholic Church. The scheme is Roman in principle, and they can do no better on that line than to accept that which is already in vogue and in experienced hands. Imitations, unless they are exact imitations, are always deceptive, always fraudulent. The aim of this “organic union,” with “the controlling purpose of a single brain,” is church control of the government, the use of the civil power for church purposes; and that is Romanism, call it what else we may.